Sadly, I doubt that Texas will join in this, simply because we have no state income tax, so the budget requires vigorous licensing fees to offset that.
This is the way it ought to be! There should be no permit required for any kind of carry. The government has no right nor authority to restrict that by any measure.
Well - I tend to agree with GCBHM.
But I had helped out during a TX CHL shooting test on the range and it was unbelievable how little to none people know about weapon and weapon safety even when they apply for a concealed carry test. I'll think we expect to much. The most running around with a by the school system purposefully lowered IQ of a fruit fly that have never seen a gun or never learned any gun safety. Not everyone out there has our level of weapon understanding than such nutcases like us that write in a weapon forum. And I am sorry some questions in weapon forums about a weapon I find... well at least they try to inform themselves.
Now the Millenniums coming and they are absolutely entitled to almost any and everything because they exist. The believe everyone else have to take responsibly for their actions. Do U really want to give the Millenniums a firearm regardless?
Just sit in a Mal and watch the moms with their 5 kids, do you really want to give her a firearm without any question ask, she cannot take care oin her kids believes everyone else in the Mal have to do that and their kids are deatly forces out of control. You want to give her in addition a loaded firearm? Are U sure? This morning the TV again reports (if its true) that a child shoot themselves accidentally in the belly. What did the parents or the parent do and how do they handle a gun in that house? Who is really running the show there? The children like often that I see?
Just watch in WalMart the people going in and out and thing each of them would have a loaded firearm. That is really scary and makes you goosebumps.
I tend to say everyone should be able to carry a firearm regardless. But as long as we don't coming back to our senses and raising the kids again as responsible, for their own actions responsible citizens, I'll think we need prove that the person that want carry a firearm at least is responsible, understands the danger of that tool and can at least handle gun safety. That means a capability test.
Sorry.
And now U can call me a liberal. Hahaha
This is the way it ought to be! There should be no permit required for any kind of carry. The government has no right nor authority to restrict that by any measure.
Honestly, though - there should be a mandatory training period. The thought of some of the world's idiots waking around with guns and NO training scares the crap out of me.
Some of the idiots WITH training do things that scare the crap out of me....
I'm not entirely opposed to a capability test except that it infringes our right to keep AND bear arms. The government should have absolutley NO, ZERO say in who carries what or what they carry.
Honestly, though - there should be a mandatory training period. The thought of some of the world's idiots waking around with guns and NO training scares the crap out of me.
Some of the idiots WITH training do things that scare the crap out of me....
And think about all those wouldbe thugs who you know have top shelf training carrying Glocks (Hi=Points). No, although I do prefer people have training, at least of the basic course, any government control over it is completely against liberty, and infringes our right to keep and bear arms.
Sadly, I doubt that Texas will join in this, simply because we have no state income tax, so the budget requires vigorous licensing fees to offset that.
I'm not entirely opposed to a capability test except that it infringes our right to keep AND bear arms. The government should have absolutley NO, ZERO say in who carries what or what they carry.
And so, simply because cars didn't exist then and therefore weren't mentioned, you would prefer to see no driving test required? That is, in effect, what you're saying.
And so, simply because cars didn't exist then and therefore weren't mentioned, you would prefer to see no driving test required? That is, in effect, what you're saying.
No, that is what you are saying. I stated that although I would prefer for people to have training, I am opposed to government controls of any kind. Simply stated, you can't compare cars to guns. No one has a right to drive as protected by the BoR; however, we do have the right to keep and bear arms as acknowledged by that document.
Having said that, operating a car is a bit more complicated than operating a gun, and it puts more people at risk; therefore, one must prove they deserve the privilege of operating one. Now, there are some folks who have no business with a gun, or anything that could hurt themselves or others, as prescribed by a doctor in the order of mental defects, but that isn't the point of this thread.
The point, as I meant it, is that no amount of government control is going to ensure safety. No matter how many laws it enacts, there will always be someone who ignores it and goes their merry way. Hence, any government control is senseless.
The point, as I meant it, is that no amount of government control is going to ensure safety. No matter how many laws it enacts, there will always be someone who ignores it and goes their merry way. Hence, any government control is senseless.
And straight back to "if it isn't 100% then it's not worth doing." No lethal weapon should be allowed to be owned and used, and especially carried, without a safety briefing. That is NOT "infringement" (which for some reason is more sacred to you than people's right to life)
The point, as I meant it, is that no amount of government control is going to ensure safety. No matter how many laws it enacts, there will always be someone who ignores it and goes their merry way. Hence, any government control is senseless.
And straight back to "if it isn't 100% then it's not worth doing." No lethal weapon should be allowed to be owned and used, and especially carried, without a safety briefing. That is NOT "infringement" (which for some reason is more sacred to you than people's right to life)
If you restrict one right, you have infrigned the right to life. If that person, who has not passed a test, for which there could be many reasons, to be able to carry the gun is unable to use a gun to defend their life, then what good has the test done? And what is the purpose of that test? To keep others safe? Again, no measure of government control is going to ensure safety. The person who cannot pass said test is surely going to carry a gun if they want to, so again, any government measure to control firearms is futile, and no, it does not help keep fatalities down. That is a myth.
The right to bear arms has no restrictions on it whatsoever, and it is intended not to. The very basic right to life is the primary reason for the right to bear arms, and the government should have no say in it at all, period. Now, wrt training, let basic gun safety and responsibility be taught at the earliest possible age, but not by any government agency requiring it to license one to carry.
Disagree 100% with the first part there. If some "idiot with gun" who has no training shoots me by mistake, then MY rights have been infringed. Big time.
Taking a safety course is not an infringement - it is a courtesy to the rest of the general public. I know that in Anarchists' Heaven that doesn't matter because everyone is responsible for themselves and no-one else matters, but we are living in the Real World here, where common courtesy and consideration (like not shooting people "by accident") DO matter, whichever side of the political aisle you sit.
What is the fatality rate on the Autobahn? The logic is not sound. Comparing cars to guns is like comparing apples to pigs. There is a stark contrast in government control and the laws society set. Society clearly does not want gun control regardless of how many elitist morons insist we need it. NO AMOUNT OF GUN CONTROL WILL ENSURE SAFETY. Surely you understand that logic.
Disagree 100% with the first part there. If some "idiot with gun" who has no training shoots me by mistake, then MY rights have been infringed. Big time.
Taking a safety course is not an infringement - it is a courtesy to the rest of the general public. I know that in Anarchists' Heaven that doesn't matter because everyone is responsible for themselves and no-one else matters, but we are living in the Real World here, where common courtesy and consideration (like not shooting people "by accident") DO matter, whichever side of the political aisle you sit.
Your right to what, exactly? What is the difference in that and that same idiot jumping behind the wheel of a car drunk and plowing into you, killing you, leaving your family without a father/husband? Have those DUI laws ensured safety? What was the rate of drunk driving fatalities prior to that law?
With drugs, has the war on drugs helped that problem or made it worse?
How about the prohibition in the 20s? Better or worse for wear?
The simple fact of the matter is that government controls do not help. People still ignore them to do what they want reagardless.
You don't have to shout - it doesn't make it more right. Totally agree. But if you think anything less than 100% means you don't have to bother, well, don't drive through my town, 'K? And don't bring a gun to my town, either. If manufacturers thought that way, there would be no safety recalls, there would be horrendous insurance rates as well. Think.
Indiana is a relatively pro-2nd Amendment State. But I once read where one of our 'illustrious' representatives stated, "We're not just going to let anyone walk around with a gun on them without first obtaining a permit." In other words, we're going to require our citizens to pay us revenue before we allow them to engage in one of their basic rights. :roll:
BTW, aside from basic rifle training in the army, I'm completely self-educated concerning every aspect of firearms and ballistics. And after all this time, I'll be danged if I'm going to let some arrogant chrome dome wearing dark shades, 5/11s, and a tactical vest tell me how to handle my firearms. Thankfully, IN doesn't require any kind of invasive training or testing, and the media isn't reporting an inordinate number of careless shooting incidents as they surely would if they could. So, I say dump the requirement to obtain permits. But as long as greed is a prohibitive factor, this will probably never happen in my lifetime.
Honestly, though - there should be a mandatory training period. The thought of some of the world's idiots waking around with guns and NO training scares the crap out of me.
Some of the idiots WITH training do things that scare the crap out of me....
it doesn't scare the crap out of you that someone with no training or experience can buy a 40' Class A motor home and drive it to Florida with just a regular operator's license, but to drive a commercial truck over 26,000 gvw you have to have a special license, special road test, and some level of experience? Who's kidding who here? It's all about the money. The RV industry has very successfully fought against commercial license requirements for a Class A RV driver who can drive a 40 footer "legally" with no training and no experience. Never mind they could potentially wipe out a school bus carrying 60 kids on the interstate, they don't need anything but the money to buy and the salesman tosses them the keys and says "have a nice trip to Florida". But we have to restrict guns to "only those with training"?????? Doesn't appear to be a level playing field, does it??? Now I'm not saying training isn't warranted What I am saying is that if you want to make everyone safer, make oversize vehicle operation subject to training. NO laws on that now "unless you are doing it for a living, then they want to tax and "fee" the crap out of you.
I would like to have a mandatory gun safety class starting in junior high. I can at least dream right?
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Handgun Forum
474.6K posts
37.9K members
Since 2006
A forum community dedicated to handgun owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!